I want to make a very short statement before the debate on the Estimate commences. Since last week we have made arrangements with the Great Southern Railways Company so that we shall have the post going to all the principal centres in the country every day. The mails will be carried by bus services, supplementary to the railway services. The principle has been agreed upon, but we shall have to wait for the details, which will be advertised locally as well as centrally. The main point is that we will keep up the postal services to the chief places every day. The public has shown so much understanding that all we can do is to ask them to give us the benefit of their patience until the scheme has been properly worked out.
Committee on Finance. - Vote 61—Posts and Telegraphs (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:—
That a sum, not exceeding £1,911,345, be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1945, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (45 and 46 Vict., c. 74; 8 Edw. 7, c. 48; 1 and 2 Geo. 5, c. 26; the Telegraph Acts, 1863 to 1928; No. 14 of 1940 (secs. 30 and 31); No. 14 of 1942 (sec. 23); etc.); and of certain other Services administered by that Office.
The chief feature of this Estimate in the past was its lack of variety; it invariably followed the same well-worn track and the same details were set out each year in the same stereotyped fashion. The only change introduced this year is the Minister's reference to the recent restriction of train services which will affect deliveries in town and country. I sincerely hope the Minister will take steps to reduce the inconvenience to the public to the barest minimum. The Minister can easily envisage the hardship and disorganisation created by undue delays in the delivery of letters. I am thinking particularly of the delivery of supplies—letters from the country shopkeepers to wholesalers in the towns and cities dealing with the delivery of supplies. While I agree that earlier posting may meet the situation to some extent, it can do so only to a very small extent. It is not possible, in many instances, to post letters early because shopkeepers may not be aware of their requirements, as they may not receive orders until perhaps the day before deliveries are required. I am sure the Minister will exhaust every possibility in order to see that the postal services are maintained at least to the present standard so far as it is physically possible to do so in the circumstances that exist.
The Minister mentioned that the net surplus from the postal, telegraphs and telephone services last year was £190,000 and that the income from telephones alone amounted to £245,000. That goes to show that the telephone, as a means of communication, is in more general use daily. For that reason, I think it is the duty of the Minister and the Department to see that the country gets a more efficient telephone service. There is no question that, as the years pass, the telephone will become more and more the medium of communication in this country. It will eventually supersede the telegraph and to some extent I believe it will supersede the post as well. That, after all, is but natural and it is merely following the same line of development as has taken place in other countries—in other, perhaps, more progressive countries. I think it is up to the Department to see that the telephone service is brought up to the highest possible standard of efficiency.
I have occasion to use the telephone a good deal. I have no complaint about local calls. They are invariably answered promptly and dealt with capably. But I have a complaint about trunk calls. I am not referring to the peak hours, because I realise that there are bound to be delays during peak hours. I am speaking of the other hours when traffic is not nearly so heavy and the delays are still abnormal. I have had to wait for an hour on occasions for a reply to a trunk call from my own office in Sligo. I wonder if there is not some means of checking up and timing these calls in the various offices through which they pass to Dublin. By continuous timing, the Minister will eventually succeed in finding out where the delays occur and eliminate the cause of these delays. It appears to me that the Department is not taking any adequate steps to stop the cause of these delays and to eliminate any possibility of waste of time occurring once the trunk call is recorded. At all events, as the telephone is becoming more and more the medium of communication, it should be the duty of the Minister and the Department to make the service more efficient each year. The Minister did not make any mention of any steps that he or his Department had taken to make the telephone service a more efficient medium of communication than it is at the moment.
Complaints were made in the discussion on the Post Office Estimate on the last occasion about certain provincial offices being understaffed. I have some experience of provincial offices and there seems to be a general complaint that these offices are understaffed. The Minister seems to be making a big profit out of the postal, telegraph and telephone services and there is no reason why he should not see that the principal provincial offices, as well as the Dublin offices, are adequately staffed. The delays sometimes, especially during rush periods, are abnormal. If, by increasing the staff by one or two members, the public were deprived of a source of complaint, it would add very much to the amenities of life generally. Officials complain that they have made representations over and over again to the head office for an increase in staff and that these representations have been invariably turned down, although they have proved to their own satisfaction on paper many times that the additional staff is required for the efficient conduct of the services in these offices.
On the last occasion on which we discussed this Estimate the question of the charge for rural deliveries of telegrams was raised. In fact, I think the question has been raised on every Post Office Estimate discussion that has taken place in the Dáil. I wonder if the Minister has looked into the matter since the question was last raised, I think about November last. The charge for the first mile, I think, is 3d. and, where a telegram has to be delivered four, five or six miles from the telegraph office, the charge may sometimes be as high as 2/- or 2/6. It seems to me that that charge is entirely exorbitant. The Minister should look into the question and see if he cannot wipe out that charge altogether. It does impose a hardship on many country people, especially on the occasion of deaths and weddings when they receive a number of telegrams and they find subsequently that the porterage charges are exceptionally high. I suggest to the Minister that he should look into the matter and see if it is not possible either to reduce the charge or to wipe it out altogether. He probably may have to go to the Minister for Finance to get sanction to do that, but I suggest that it would be well worth his while to approach the Minister with the object of getting that charge wiped out completely and absolutely, if it is possible to do so.
I should also like to know when the next issue of the telephone directory will be made. On the last occasion, I think it was after a nine-months' interval, but on this occasion I think a 12-months' period will elapse before the next issue. I suggest to the Minister that, in the meantime, he should issue a little supplement or list of names of the people who have had telephones installed since the last issue. I happened to be looking for a telephone number recently and I knew perfectly well that the person was on the telephone, but his name was not in the directory. That is the experience of some people. The amount of paper required would be negligible and, for the sake of conveniencing the public generally, it would be well worth the Minister's while, if 12 months have to elapse in future between each issue of the directory, to issue a supplement of a page or two giving the names and addresses of the subscribers who have been added since the previous issue.
While I have to complain of under-staffing in the provincial offices, and of delays in connection with trunk telephone calls, I must say that I have always received the greatest courtesy, assistance and co-operation from the members of the Post Office staff, with whom I have to deal very frequently. Their whole-hearted co-operation and assistance has been invaluable to me on many occasions in the conduct of my own business, and I should like to avail of this opportunity to pay them that deserved tribute.
I am glad to associate myself with the tribute paid by Deputy Roddy to the courtesy and helpfulness of the officials of the Post Office. That, however, does not deter me from also associating myself with him in his complaint about the trunk service. I am informed by the Department that the reason for the delay in the trunk service is that there are not enough lines, and that they cannot instal lines because they cannot get supplies. The fault of that rests with this Minister and his predecessor in that they never anticipated the abnormal demand for telephone services. The use of the telephone will increase, provided its use is not characterised by such an incident as I experienced yesterday. I was speaking on the telephone yesterday to a public man. After we had been speaking for some time, a noise was heard as if somebody was interrupting the connection. Our conversation continued, and then the voice of a third party was heard which began to ridicule, and ended in threats. I have no doubt that both the ridicule and the threats had their origin in a very vulgar and misplaced practical joke. But how did that third party gain access to the line over which I was speaking to a public man in this city, and, having gained access to the line, how did he manage to hear both our conversations and to interpose his in ours as a running commentary on what we had to say?
I need hardly say that, despite the threatening nature of the intervention, I concluded my conversation and got in touch with the Minister's Department at once, asking that the fullest investigation be made as to the identity of the person who had interrupted the conversation, and of the manner in which he had gained access to the line. Albeit the substance of this may be more ridiculous than important, surely the fact that an unauthorised person could intervene and listen to private conversations on the telephone will react very unfavourably on the service as a whole, if it becomes common knowledge that such interference is practicable and undetectable. The Minister's officers have full particulars of that incident, supplied to them within ten minutes of its having occurred, and I have received a promise of a careful investigation of the incident.
I regard it as a very grave incident indeed, because there is no use in disguising the fact that many of us have apprehended from time to time that our conversations on the telephone were listened to. I know that the Minister for Justice has, in certain selected cases, commissioned high officers of the Gárda Síochána to intervene on public lines with a view to detecting criminal conspiracies conducted by telephone. I appreciate the danger of that concession, of that right to the Minister for Justice, because executive persons may get very strange ideas into their heads as to what are criminal conversations. For instance, the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defensive Measures thinks that anyone who criticises de Valera is engaged in a criminal conversation. Therefore, it becomes extremely significant if irresponsibles can gain access to a telephone line, and I think it behoves the Minister to give an exhaustive explanation here of how an incident of that kind could take place.
Deputy Roddy has spoken with complete satisfaction of the local call. I suppose the local call in Sligo and provincial centres is reasonably satisfactory, but still in the City of Dublin, if you dial "O", you are liable to wait anything from 14 to 28 beats of the bell before anybody answers. If you want to send a telegram—I think the dial number is 39—you get a reasonably rapid reply, but on almost any other service you are liable to be kept waiting while the bell rings 15 or 20 times. That is pure inefficiency and nothing else. I suppose that question has been raised by others and by myself in this Dáil at least 20 times on various occasions, and certainly, over the last six or seven years, on the occasion of every Posts and Telegraphs Estimate. It is absurd that repeated representations of that kind should be necessary in respect of what appears to be a very trifling matter.
I should be glad to know from the Minister whether the new arrangements which he has put in force for the protection of mail bags has resulted in a better return of the mail bags which have been let out, because for some time past there has been a good deal of complaint that mail bags have been lost in quantities much greater than would appear to be reasonable, and the matter was commented on unfavourably by the Comptroller and Auditor-General last year and the year before. I do not want to add anything to that because I wish to emphasise to the House the very serious gravity of the possibility of persons intervening on private telephone lines, more especially if the Minister finds himself constrained to say that he is quite unable to detect how it happened.
I suggest to him that he might reasonably accede to Deputy Roddy's request in regard to the dying service of the telegraph, that is, to remove the porterage charge in rural areas. Deputy Roddy aptly directed the attention of the House to the fact that if somebody dies and friends want to send a message of sympathy or something of the kind, they are reluctant to do so because if 15 or 20 telegrams arrive at a poor man's house, the charge is intolerable. After all, the service is a public service. I cannot find in the Appropriations-in-Aid any figure for the revenue which the Post Office derives from porterage fees on telegrams, but it cannot be very large. It usually involves sending a 15-year old lad out on a bicycle to deliver the message, and it is fantastic in this day and age to ask country people to pay 1/- or 2/- in order to get telegrams for the sending of which they had no responsibility. I imagine that the revenue is microscopic; I assure the Minister that the inconvenience in rural Ireland is considerable; and I strongly urge him to make an end of it as soon as possible.
Deputy Dillon is a most unfortunate man. When he lifts the receiver and dials "O", he has to wait for 15 beats. The average person probably waits for four beats and then gets an answer. If the Deputy examines it further, he will probably find that there is a very sinister conspiracy in the fact that when he lifts the receiver and dials he has to wait for that period.
I do not know why the Deputy has to indulge in impudence. He is not the Minister, and God forbid that he ever should be.
I am not making the suggestion in the form of impudence.
Only the Minister is entitled to indulge in impudence apparently.
We have learned to expect it from the Minister.
I listened with great interest to the Deputy's reference to the telephone conversation with which there was some interference by a third party. I think everybody to-day knows that the Department of Justice and the Department of Defence, having some responsibility for the preservation of the country's peace and so forth, do take the responsibility of listening in to conversations from time to time. I have had the experience of lines crossing, and it is not unusual to find, after a heavy storm, that when dialling a particular number on these automatic telephones, you get a completely different number. You may get your neighbour and he may get you, when he dials, or you might have people listening in. I did not rise solely for the purpose of referring to the Deputy's contribution, but I thought it rather interesting that he had had a different experience from that which I have had. I have never had to wait for 14 beats after dialling "O".
I rose chiefly to make two suggestions. I know that, generally speaking, throughout the whole postal service, it cannot be suggested that the salaries and wages paid to postmasters and postmistresses are on the extravagant side, and I know that the Minister himself has great sympathy with them and is anxious to improve their position, so far as salaries and wages are concerned. I suggest two steps which the Minister might consider, because they are both new or additional services for which he could charge poundage or a fee of some kind, as a result of which he might be able to give extra remuneration to that underpaid section known as postmasters and postmistresses.
The first is a matter I mentioned many years ago, but I understand that the desire then was not to interfere with banks. I think the time has come when we ought to realise that the State requires considerable amounts of money which it has to borrow and that there are a number of people who have large cash balances on deposit for which they get only 1 per cent. in the banks. I think there should be a new departure, in an arrangement for the taking in of larger deposits than are at present permitted. Even if a slightly lesser rate of interest is allowed on the larger deposits than on deposits on the basis of the present arrangement, the Department will get in very considerable sums by way of deposits; depositors will get very considerable increases, even if they get only a half per cent. over the present bank rate; and the State will effect a very considerable saving in the difference between what they would pay for moneys deposited in the Post Office and what they have to pay for it in the ordinary way. I know that the Minister will probably reply by saying that the Department of Finance will take the view that we must not interfere with the business of the banks. I want to say that I do not see why the business of the banks should be protected any more than anybody else's business is protected. We have reached a stage now in which the State, by force of circumstances, is interfering with everybody's business in every conceivable way, and I think the old-fashioned idea of not tolerating any suggestion of State interference with banking business should now go by the board and that the State should realise that there is an opportunity now of getting very many millions of pounds in the Post Office Savings Bank at a very considerable saving to the State.
There is another matter to which I should like to refer, and again the question of the banks arises here. There are very many areas in this country where you have not got bank branches. In these areas there is a number of small or medium, and in some cases very large, employers, who have to pay, weekly, wages to their staffs, very often at very great inconvenience to themselves and sometimes to others as a result of having to travel a considerable distance, in many cases, in order to bring in money for the payment of these wages. I think that arrangements should be made through the Post Office whereby, if there is not sufficient money available in the particular branch of the bank concerned, the manager could advise the Post Office, or have his bank advise the Post Office, that so much money would be required each week and have it paid through the Post Office so that at the weekend, on a chit or note from the bank manager, the Post Office could pay out the wages for these workers. I do not propose to go into the technical details by which such an arrangement could be come to, but I suggest that something ought to be done in that regard. For instance, in the harvesting time, such an arrangement would save the employer concerned from having to travel a long distance, involving a waste of necessary time, in order to collect a week's wages. If the matter were to be properly examined, I think the Minister would realise that the service I have suggested would be availed of by a considerable number of people throughout the country, particularly the farming community, and, as I say, he could charge a poundage for these services. If he makes the contention that it would involve additional work on the postmasters or postmistresses, I suggest that the way to overcome that difficulty would be to pay higher salaries and get persons competent to deal with the particular subject I am discussing.
I do not expect the Minister to give us, or to give me at any rate, a reply to the suggestions I have made here, but I am making them in the hope that having got it, say, on the records of the House, he will ask his officials to give consideration to the matter, and in due course to let him know whether anything can be done in this way. I hope also that there will be something in the way of a sympathetic approach to the suggestion that, so far as deposits are concerned, that is not a right that has been given to the banks alone, or that they are the only concerns who can hold the deposits of the people. I think the State should take advantage of the present situation, where there are very large deposits in the banks all over the country, to attract these deposits to the Post Office by offering rates of interest which, if not very high, would certainly be more than the people are able to get for their deposits in the ordinary banks. I think that such a policy would be good for everybody, and I hope that this matter, as I have suggested before, will not be considered from the point of view that we should not interfere with the business of the banks because the Department of Finance may advise that we should not interfere with it. I sincerely hope that my suggestion will not be approached in that spirit at all.
I want to avail of the discussion on this Estimate for the purpose of endeavouring to ascertain from the Minister what is the policy of the Post Office in respect of post office buildings. To me it seems that the main feature of that policy at the moment is a complete lack of imagination and a complete absence of planning. Many of the post offices which are used throughout the country, and especially the head offices, are utterly unsuitable for the accommodation of Post Office business on its present scale, and the accommodation in many of these offices, from a staff point of view, is again very unsatisfactory and very unsuitable. It is quite a common feature to find the post office, in an important town or city, situated in a side street, away from the general current of public traffic, and, in addition to that, one finds the building by no means impressive, and frequently a type of building which was built very many years ago, and in connection with which very little notice has been taken of the development of Post Office traffic in the meantime. From time to time, complaints have been made by the staff regarding the unsatisfactory accommodation from their point of view, as well as from the point of view of the inadequate accommodation available for the transaction of public business. When these complaints are made and pressed by sustained agitation, the Post Office authorities then proceed to patch up the office concerned by making a slight extension here and doing a bit of huckstering there, and the whole effect is that, while they do effect some small improvement, the general position and problem remain the same. The Minister has experience of that in his own constituency, in connection with the Waterford Post Office, where they have been huckstering at the position for the last 20 years and where, after 20 years of misplaced endeavour and wasted ardour, the position of that post office is as unsatisfactory as it was 20 years ago if, in fact, it is not worse. I think that on a previous occasion I succeeded in getting the Minister to give some little consideration to the position in that post office—no wonder the Minister sighs—but I suggest that the next time he is in Waterford he ought to go into the post office there and see for himself what the position is.
I saw it.
At any rate, I am sure that he will find it to be most unsatisfactory and that he will find that if he can get the Post Office authorities to move in the matter there is scope for a very substantial improvement in its construction. I instance that, as evidence of the patching and huckstering policy of the Post Office authorities in regard to buildings. Another example is the case of the Pearse Street post office in Dublin. Some years ago, when the present Minister for Justice was Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, we had a statement from him, in 1938, I think, to the effect that he expected that a brand new office would be opened there in 1941, and the then Minister for Posts and Telegraphs said he was perfectly satisfied that the new building would be an ornament both to the Post Office and to the people of the neighbourhood concerned. We are now in the year 1944, there is still no new post office in Pearse Street, and the present ramshackle building still does service as the central sorting and packing office in the country. As an instance of the bad conditions obtaining in that post office I may mention that the roof is of such a character that in the summer tar from the roof leaks into the office on the correspondence and on the clothing of the staff, and then, at the end of the summer, when the tar stops leaking the rain takes up the running for the winter months, the result being that the staff in Pearse Street gets sprayed with tar from the roof during the summer and with rain during the winter. If you ask the Post Office authorities to do something to remedy that situation, somebody gets up on the roof and puts more tar on it, and then you have the rain afterwards, and the same conditions prevail as before.
That is an example of the huckstering policy of the Post Office. It is well known that many traders in various towns in the country have much better premises than the local post office has. I have seen better bookmakers' shops or premises in country towns than those of the local post office, and if a bookmaker, who is not usually a philanthropist from a public point of view, can manage to put up a decent shop, I suggest that the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs ought to be able to provide more satisfactory accommodation for the transaction of Post Office business and for the accommodation of the staffs concerned. I think that the Post Office authorities ought at least to erect decent buildings for the carrying on of the very vital work which is done in these offices. Probably, it cannot be done now, while the present emergency lasts, but what is the post-war policy of the Post Office authorities in that regard, or have they any plans for improving the standard of Post Office building and seeing that proper service is given to the public? It is a vital service which is used extensively and there should be proper accommodation for the transaction of Post Office business and for the accommodation of the staff.
The Minister told us in the course of his speech that there was a surplus, and a very substantial surplus, on the operation of the telephone service. May I say to the Minister that that surplus has been made possible by the very efficient manner in which the telephone service is run? Nobody contributes more to that efficiency than the operating staff of the telephone service—those who are telephonists and those who are engaged on the maintenance staff. Both sections of the staff run a very efficient and excellent service, and as the Minister has such a very substantial surplus on telephone working, I think he should share some of that surplus with the staff who make the operation of the service so satisfactory and so remunerative from the Department's point of view. There is scope for a very substantial improvement in the wages scales of the engineering staff and the telephonist staff. There is a very strong case also for an improvement in the remuneration paid to night telephonists. I should like to call the Minister's attention to the fact that there are 20 full-time operators whose wages are less than £3 a week, and although they have substantial periods of service they do not get a halfpenny of wages if they fall sick after performing arduous periods of night duty.
Apart from the full-time staff who are inadequately paid, the Minister must be aware that much dissatisfaction exists in regard to the payment of part-time staff. In fact, the whole position of night telephonists is most unsatisfactory. While you have people employed and graded as part-time operators, at the other end of the scale you have officers who are entitled to rest nights compelled to come back on their rest nights because the Post Office cannot arrange to staff the night service in a satisfactory way. I put it to the Minister that in a service of such dimensions as the telephone service, huckstering with staff in that fashion is unjustified. I suggest that he should give a direction that the part-time duties associated with the telephone service should be abolished and the service organised on the basis of full-time employment at decent rates of wages. That is the least the Minister ought to do having regard to the fact that there is such a substantial surplus from the telephone service. The Minister cannot plead that such a demand is unreasonable since a very substantial surplus is available.
I was glad to hear the Minister say that although the suspension of cross-Channel trunk communication has somewhat diminished the telephone traffic he hopes to be in a position to maintain the existing staff in employment. I would suggest that if there is any redundancy of staff consequent on the stoppage of telephone communications with cross-Channel offices, he would avail of such redundancy to train the staff further in telephone operating. In the event of some staff having to be paid off I hope the Minister will act fairly when it comes to terminating the services of redundant employees. On a previous occasion when some temporary people had to be paid off, the principle of "last in, first out" was thoroughly ignored, and we discovered that people who came in last were being kept on in preference to people who had a much longer period of service. I am not satisfied at all that merit alone was the guiding factor in selecting people for retention in the service. If staff have to be paid off on this occasion I hope the Minister will give directions that the dismissals should be on the basis of "last in, first out," which is a recognised feature of tenure in most places where temporary staff are concerned. I hope, on this occasion, that nepotism and favouritism will not operate when it comes to retaining staff or dismissing staff. I hope, however, that the Minister will find it possible to retain all the staff and that should any redundancy occur steps will be taken to give the redundant staff an opportunity to perfect their training in telephone operating.
I should like to call attention to what is a very objectionable practice on the part of the Post Office, one that has taken on a new ugliness lately. For a long time past the Department has been asked to provide an adequate staff at the public counter, but the Department adopted a very grudging attitude towards the provision of staff. They staffed the public counters in a manner which caused the maximum strain to the officers engaged on this duty and which caused the maximum of irritation to the public by having the counters inadequately staffed. After constant pressure, the Minister has somewhat improved the staffing arrangements lately, but on this point may I call attention to another cause of complaint? The Minister is now asking the people to invest money in the Savings Bank and in Savings Certificates, but I should like the Minister to walk into the G.P.O. and have a look at the people who are trying to lodge money and see the kind of service they are getting.
The staff provided for the transaction of Savings Bank business at present is utterly inadequate. While the Minister is appealing by speeches in the Dáil and by advertisements in the papers to people to invest money in the Post Office Savings Bank, he is doing everything possible to irritate them into a temper when they go to put money into the Savings Bank. I suggest that if the Minister wants people to put money into the Post Office Savings Bank he ought to take steps to see that they are given adequate facilities in the way of proper staffing at the counters. It is easy to get staff and the Minister ought to see that the matter is attended to.
A point to which I want to direct special attention concerns what I regard as a very objectionable practice on the part of the Minister. The Minister will find that those engaged on counter duty at the General Post Office are generally very young officers whose scales of wages are very low. Duty at the public counter involves work at a very high pressure at all times. There is a constant strain; there is no relaxation from the time a person goes on duty until he comes off duty. He has got to work at high pressure all the time and under the new services which are being operated by the Post Office he is dealing with a new type of business. The activities of the counter officer are highly diversified as compared with ten years ago. It is recognised that losses at the counter are inevitable in these conditions and that when a person is handling a sum of, say, £700—some officers may be handling as much as £3,000 or £4,000— occasionally he will lose money. It is not possible to say how that money is lost. A person is called upon to take over £4,000 on taking up duty and when he comes to balance his accounts in the evening he finds that he has only £3,999. He can throw no light on where the missing £1 went in the multitudinous transactions which he has had to perform.
The British authorities dealt with that situation—in fact, I think it is pretty well an international regulation now—by providing that the officer responsible for the loss would pay for the loss so long as it did not exceed 5 per cent. of his wages. Small sums of money lost by such officers such as 6d., 2/- or 3/-, whilst they are nominally covered by the 5 per cent. arrangement, are in fact made good by the officer concerned. He does not want the matter to be reported and does not bother about the application of the 5 per cent. rule. Almost every officer engaged in counter duty finds it necessary to make good these small losses of 6d., 2/- or 3/- from time to time. To that extent he has that continual drain on his wages each week or month as the case may be. The normal operation of the 5 per cent. rule to such losses results in the officer being penalised for his losses, and frequent losses bring the officer under disciplinary notice. Recently the Post Office have not been satisfied with the application of the 5 per cent. rule and instead they have made a number of officers contribute substantial sums out of their wages to make good counter losses. They are not satisfied with the application of the 5 per cent. rule and demand what is equivalent to 15, 20 and even 30 per cent. contribution.
The staff object to imposing on the officer a responsibility for contributing towards the loss a sum much greater than he would contribute under the 5 per cent. rule. Post Office clerks work under very great difficulties at these counters and I suggest to the Minister that he ought to advise the Post Office authorities to get back to the application of the 5 per cent. rule, except in cases of proved carelessness. If there is an obvious case of carelessness, that is a matter to be dealt with separately, but I have noticed a tendency in recent cases to ignore the 5 per cent. rule and impose special contributions and fines where counter losses occurred. If there are cases of obvious negligence, these can be dealt with separately, but I have had to take up cases with the Post Office in which nobody could explain how the losses occurred. The Post Office applies some undefined, scientific formula of their own in these cases and proceed to fine the officer guilty of culpable negligence. If one asks them where the negligence occurred, they cannot say. I suggest to the Minister that he ought to direct the Post Office authorities to get back to the 5 per cent. rule, that he should recognise that these are young officers, that many of them are inexperienced, that their scale of wages is small, that they work under high pressure and do not relax from the time they go on duty until they go off duty, that they have to deal with many new services and that they attend to the requirements of the public very efficiently and diligently, a fact to which testimony is given in the many tributes paid to the Post Office staff by the public.
Another matter to which I want to refer is that of the incremental scales of the Post Office staff. The most vicious feature of Post Office wage-scales is the long and weary incremental scales which the staff have to traverse before they reach even the low maximum provided for the various grades. The House will, probably, be astonished when I tell them that the munificence of the Post Office towards its staff is frequently represented by the grant of an annual increment of 1/-. In other words, they serve for a whole year and their efficiency during the year is recognised by an increment of 1/-. One would not give it to a tinker to get him to clear off at a fair. Can anybody imagine a more Machiavellian scheme of increments than that which provides, in the year 1944, an increment of 1/-? When the person concerned happens to be an auxiliary postman, they give him an increment of ½d. per hour. When he goes into the office, he is kept on starting pay for some time. At the end of the five years, he is given ½d. per hour of an increment and, at the end of another period of five years, he is given another ½d. These are the incremental scales which apply to the Post Office staff and that notwithstanding that the Minister has a substantial surplus on the Post Office service. These increments were of British origin but, although the Minister belongs to a Party that want to break the connection with Britain, he does not want to break the incremental connection with Britain. He wants to keep the British incremental scales, with this difference, that to-day his scales are worse than the existing British scales. The British have improved their Victorian scales but the republican Minister for Posts and Telegraphs prefers the scales of Victoria to the republican scales of the 1916 Proclamation. I suggest to the Minister that his incremental scales belong to another age; in fact, to another world, and that he should take steps substantially to improve the incremental scales of the staff.
I should like to give the House a picture of what happens in the Post Office from the standpoint of increments. Take a Grade A clerk—the highest grade of Post Office clerk. He enters the service at 18 years of age, his basic salary being 22/-. He reaches a maximum of 70/-, but it takes him 22 years from the time he enters to move from 22/- basic to 70/- basic. In other words, he goes in at 18 and, when 40 years of age, reaches the basic maximum of 70/- per week. A Grade A female clerk, who goes in at 18 years of age, gets 22/- a week and, after 19 increments, reaches 47/- a week. When she is 37 years of age she enjoys the munificent maximum salary of 47/- a week, basic. Take the case of the Grade A postman—the highest grade of postman. He goes in at 18 years of age and gets 20/- a week, basic. He is allowed to go to a maximum of 50/-, but it takes him 19 years to get there, so that he is 37 years of age when he is in receipt of 50/- a week. A Grade B postman enters at 18 years of age and receives 20/-. He reaches the low maximum of 41/- a week, but it takes him 14 years to progress from the wage of 18/- to 41/- a week, so that he is 32 when he reaches his maximum. A telephonist enters at 18 years of age on a salary of 22/- and reaches a maximum of 35/- after 11 years' service. I suggest to the Minister that these incremental scales cannot be justified in light of the modern trend of thought in respect of salary and wage scales.
There is no parallel for these long incremental scales with low minima and maxima. I should like the Minister to picture the position of a young officer— a postman or a Post Office clerk—who marries about 25 or 26 years of age. He has then the problem of keeping a house, paying rent, buying clothes for himself and his wife, buying fuel and food and providing the other amenities of a civilised existence. Then comes the time when children are born to the newly-married pair and that imposes a very heavy responsibility on him. I know, personally, that these young officers are in very serious difficulty in trying to make ends meet on the low-wage scales which apply in the Post Office. They struggle on in the face of their very heavy domestic responsibilities, but the struggle is a very unequal one so far as the officer is concerned. His low-wage scales are incapable of providing him with the wherewithal to maintain himself and his family, and his incremental scales are so low that even the maxima of the scales of such officers are utterly insufficient to provide for the responsibilities of the young married officer.
Many of these officers have come to me to tell me of the way in which they are forced to live because of the low wages and the hopelessly inadequate increments allowed to them. The rent of their houses gets into arrears, food and clothing become scarce and as their responsibilities develop, they find themselves deeper and deeper in debt, and you find a situation in which many of the young officers are worried to death because they are unable to pay their accounts. Yet they are employed in a public service where the highest standard of rectitude is expected. The Minister must know, because abundant evidence has been produced, that a situation of that kind exists in the Post Office, and that it is a serious situation from the point of view of the staff. To talk of a surplus on the working of the Post Office is something of which the Minister and the Department have no right to be proud.
In 1939 and 1940, the previous Minister for Posts and Telegraphs admitted that he was impressed by a case presented on behalf of the staff for an increase in wages and a steeper scale of increments as compared with the scale in operation to-day, but subsequently the Minister said that owing to the emergency he was not able to apply the remedy which it was hoped he would apply when he heard the case in the first instance. I suggest to the Minister that even if there is an emergency there is also a surplus, and the Minister ought to utilise that surplus to pay the staff better rates of wages than are paid to-day, and that, above all, he ought to take steps to improve the incremental scale. His predecessor admitted that he was favourably impressed by the case for the staff, and now that there is a surplus, I will appeal to the Minister to apply the obvious remedy to remove the hardships which exist in the Post Office. If the Minister does that, I can assure him that he will earn the gratitude of a staff which has suffered far too long from these scandalously low incremental scales.
There are two topics that I would like to mention on this Estimate. I do not blame the Minister for the first one, because it is part of the Post Office system generally in all countries where the Post Office is the property of the citizens of a State. Since the postal service grew up, and of course that includes the telegraph and telephone services, the tendency has been to run the services more for the benefit of the larger centres of population than for the rural districts. I suppose that has its historical origin, but in a country like ours we should depart from that precedent. I will give the Minister one clear case in point. After all, all citizens are equal in this country, and whether; by accident of their occupations, they live in the country or in the city, they should have the same opportunity as all other citizens.
In part of my constituency there is what is known as a two-day service, a delivery only every second day. I think that the man who lives in the most remote part of County Wexford is just as much entitled to his daily service as the man who lives in the centre of Dublin or any other city. The postal service is meant to be run for the benefit of every one in this country, and I would like the Minister, who is always receptive to new ideas, to bear in mind in his future planning that the agricultural community should get its full share of the benefits of this State service in all parts of the country.
The next point which I want to put to the Minister concerns certain rumours I have heard going around. I heard the rumour in Dublin, and I heard it in the country, and it has been heard in a railway train. It concerns the ownership of the land on which certain of the Post Office buildings are situated. There is one astonishing rumour going around and I would be glad to hear the Minister contradict it, because if it is true it discloses a most remarkable state of affairs. We have in this city a very historic building, the General Post Office, and this rumour, as it is very prevalent, should be denied, that certain non-nationalists came into this country and purchased certain of the lands of this country upon which State property is built, for ground rent purposes. One of the sites they are supposed to have purchased is that of the General Post Office. This rumour has been very widely circulated, and I would like to know from the Minister that it is not true. I would be glad to hear from the Minister whether the Post Office is actually situated on State property or whether there is a ground rent issuing to any particular individual. I would like the Minister to understand clearly that the only reason I mention the matter is because of the prevalence of this rumour. I suppose it is largely due to the fact that a circle of non-nationals did arrive in this country and proceeded to purchase all round them various parts of the country so that, while living in another country, they might secure for themselves a safe income out of property here. I would be glad to know that it is not correct that they have secured the ground rent of public buildings, and certainly not the ground on which such a historical building as the General Post Office stands.
Mr. Larkin
I would like to touch on one or two points. I may say that what Deputy Esmonde says has been very widely circulated in the country. It was presented to the Railway Tribunal. I remember one of the Fianna Fáil members of the corporation, a prominent member, telling a very sad story about this question of alien control of our ground rents. He practically suggested that a certain method should be used but I have not heard anything in a vocal way from that Party in the House.
May I draw your attention to the fact that on every occasion in the debate on the Estimate for the Post Office Department, everybody is fulsome and falls over the place to tell us that there is no staff in the world like the Post Office staff for capacity, intelligence and application to duty? They eulogise them in terms which they would not apply to any other Department, and after that they sit down. Then we have this realistic, picture painted of the conditions of these men and women and, of course, the women's section of the Department is growing and displacing male labour every year because women's labour is cheaper than male labour. What an absurdity. This is the most parodoxical country in the world, of course, but could anything more paradoxical than this be found? We hear people talking about democracy, the need for large families and decent homes, and the only way they attempt to do it in the Post Office is by putting the male out and putting the female in and keeping her there until she is worn out and tired and past her reproductive stage. Why any Christian should stand for that policy I cannot understand. But that is the type we have in this country-all professing to be holy members of the Christian Churches while, in their ordinary lives, they prove their hypocrisy and their lies every day.
Surely it is an outrage that the conditions described by the Leader of the Labour Party should exist in the Post Office. But that situation has prevailed all my lifetime. I remember going to the former Minister for Posts and Telegraphs with a body of men who were auxiliary postmen. The wages paid to them was 14/7 a week. They were brought in on shifts at all hours of the day and night, depending on the arrival of the American mails, for 14/7 a week. Deputy Boland, the present Minister for Justice, wanted to bring in a photographer and stenographer. He wanted to get his photograph in the paper, and he declared that he was doing all that a man could do. Fourteen shillings and seven pence a week! I am glad to say that the situation of these unfortunate men has been improved, but I am surprised that Deputy Norton did not quote the figure they get to-day.
Anyone who goes into a Post Office ought to be ashamed of himself. Is there any analogy to be drawn between conditions in the Post Office and conditions in the banks? Take the Bank of Ireland in College Green and compare that headquarters with the General Post Office or that barrack and stable down in Pearse Street. How is it that these banks can put up palatial buildings of real architectural value while a public service like the Post Office can be pushed into any kind of shop, any kind of sub-let premises, without proper lavatory accommodation for the staff? Surely, the Post Office should be the principal building in every town. It should be the centre of the life of every town.
Deputy Esmonde has been talking about Government services. I do not know whether he objects to national control or public control of a public service like the Post Office, but I wonder what private enterprise, with all its shortcomings, would do with a service like that. I suggest that the whole question resolves itself into making the service pay and ensuring that those men and women and boys get an adequate return for their services. Lately, the boys are getting a little more. Look at the boys riding these heavy bicycles in the city every day, many of them without brakes. I suggest this should be gone into in a spirit of business and not as a matter of sympathy or of giving these men any kind of charity. Give them fair decent conditions of life. That is all they require. That is all they are entitled to, but they are not getting a decent chance of life now. I know a man who was blessed with a good wife who contracted a certain form of mental trouble. That man has to keep a housekeeper and three children, and contribute to the maintenance of his wife out of a salary which a dock labourer would not accept. He is struggling along year after year. Look at the mental torture that man goes through.
Deputy Norton referred to the weariness of these men working in the General Post Office. These men are there all day, tied to their desks and often dealing with ignorant louts who insult them when they do not get what they want. Any decent employer would see that his staff had rest rooms. We have rest rooms in factories like Jacobs, and Williams and Woods, where the girls can get 20 minutes' rest if they are tired. Surely, it would be right and proper for a humane man, who knows anything about biology, to see that these women on the staff can get relaxation for ten minutes after two hours' work, with possibly a cup of tea before they go back for duty. Now, they have to go on, hour after hour, dealing with the rushes which are always to be found in that post office. I suggest to the Minister, who is a humane man, a musician, and a man with aesthetic qualities that I do not profess to have, that I would not insult myself by permitting them to live under such conditions if I knew what was going on. That is a matter we should debate at greater length if we were not prevented by the closure rule.
But, to pass on, has the Minister done anything to deal with the problem of these human budgerigars who take up the time of the Post Office telephones every day? The other day I was in College Green with a row of people waiting to use the telephone. I had not a watch—if I live long enough in the Dáil, no doubt, I may get one. I looked at the clock in College Green, and one gentleman was talking to his lady love for 20 minutes, and all sorts of banalities burst from the telephone box. On the other side there was a lady carrying on a similar conversation. I wonder how long is that going to continue. Business men are being held up waiting for telephones. There is no difficulty in providing an automatic cut-off at the end of three minutes. Let these people send their love messages over the wire at least to the value of twopence. Three minutes is long enough when you have a line of people waiting to get service. I agree with everything that has been said about the expedition with which the men on the staff apply themselves to technical difficulties. But one cannot get through all the time—there are elemental reasons such as mechanical breakdowns which prevent it. There are other things not understandable. I was trying to get a trunk call, and I had to go from one office to two other offices. I mentioned the fact in the last debate that I was trying to ring up a hospital from three places, but could not get an answer at all.
The other day when I was on my way into town, coming up the road in which I reside, I noticed a packet on the pavement. With that inquisitiveness with which I am charged, I went over to the pavement at the corner of Clyde Road and Elgin Road. It was a telegraph envelope unopened, addressed to a person in the vicinity. Although I was in a great hurry to get into town by bus I delivered that telegram, and I was very courteously thanked by the person who received it. I wrote to the Minister. I was appealed to here the other day to help in every way to carry out my public duties as a citizen but, up to now, I never even got a record, so far as I know, in writing of that particular incident. That was five days ago. I do not know what was in that telegram, whether it was a matter of life or death, but at least the Minister might have been good enough to acknowledge that I had delivered it.
That was done.
Mr. Larkin
Up to now I have never received any acknowledgement. I was going to get an inquiry made about it but, after all, it is nothing to the other complaints we have. During the last election, half of my material was never delivered and up to to-day I am waiting for action. If it has been sent out I will apologise. Why is there no book given to these servants of the State in which persons receiving these messages could sign for them? Surely a boy delivering a telegram or an express letter should have a book to show that the message has been received. That would enable you to find out in a case of urgency whether it had been received or not.
There may be an explanation. A boy may have rushed around a corner on a bicycle and may have fallen off, and the telegram may have dropped out of the bag. I am only suggesting how such incidents could be dealt with, and I am only doing so in the interest of the public service. I would be the last person who would think that the boy offended against discipline. If he did, I would protest. Some years ago I took the opportunity to refer on this Vote to the possibility of registering all radios, so that we would not have this abominable business of having inquiries made whether people had taken out licences.
That is under consideration.
That comes under the next Vote.
Mr. Larkin
All radio owners could be registered numerically, so that the postal authorities would know whether licences had been taken out or not.
I had not the advantage of hearing the Minister's statement, but I understand that he referred to the difficult times in which we are living. Everybody can assist in these times. One difficulty that some people find is that of cashing postal orders or advices. I understand that anybody who negotiates a postal order or money order for another person does so at his own risk, the orders being marked "not negotiable". It is very handy when people get a postal order or such an advice to be able to go to a trader with whom they have business dealings to have it changed. The trader then puts it through his bank account. I do not suggest that if a person obtains an order improperly, or if it was stolen or misappropriated, he should be allowed to get away with it, but I understand Deputy Norton referred to mistakes which have occurred in the Post Office and which tell against the staff. Mistakes are sometimes made owing to an advice being for a larger amount than it should be. In that case the person who negotiates the order, and it may be a small trader, is told that there is absolutely no redress though, on the face of it; the order appeared to be for a certain amount. I think the Post Office authorities might consider, where mistakes occur, and where people have been "stuck" through no fault of their own, making ex-gratia payments.
I was listening recently to the broadcast of a play in the course of which the question of cashing a cheque cropped up. One person asked whose cheque was to be cashed and when told answered "there is nothing doing." We do not want it to come about in the Post Office that, through mistakes being made, it is dangerous to cash a document which on the face of it is nominally value for so much. During the first world war the money stringency became so acute that the then British Government had to let out postal orders without charging poundage and let them pass as bank notes. That meant a very considerable alleviation of a temporary hardship. At that time I remember being appealed to by a working-man, who asked whether he ought to accept postal orders, and if the British Government would continue to be liable for the amount in view of the strain of the war. I told him that he had better take the risk, because if he got paid nine times out of ten, and if he then got "stuck" he would at any rate be better off. I suggest to the Minister that it is part of the business of small traders to help people who otherwise would have to go to the post office and fight, as Deputy Norton put it, for a place in a queue. It is much easier for people to go to a local trader and to get him to cash orders which can go through bank accounts. If it should happen that these traders are "stuck" despite what appears the face of these orders, in the case of commercial firms I suggest they would pay up and look cheerful.
I wish to appeal on behalf of what I consider to be a very deserving section of workers in the postal service, auxiliary postmen in rural areas. After spending many years in the service, when they retire they receive no pensions or gratuities. Very often, when retiring they find themselves infirm with perhaps nothing saved for the rainy day. I appeal to the Minister to introduce a scheme of pensions for these men after long and faithful service.
I should like to take this opportunity to pay a tribute to the Minister for the very capable manner in which this Department is handled. It is a very rare occasion when I can stand up in this House with a clear conscience to pay a tribute to any Department, but as far as the Posts and Telegraphs Department is concerned, I have not many complaints to make. I am quite satisfied that the Department is very efficiently run, and I am also satisfied that the Minister now in charge of it, is the right man in the right place.
I should like to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that in all post offices it is the usual custom that unemployment assistance is always cashed for the recipients on Monday, although it is sent out from the various exchanges throughout the country on Friday. I wonder would it be possible for the Minister to make arrangements to have these paying orders cashed in the post offices on Saturday so as to enable the wives and families of unemployed persons to secure the supplies necessary to carry them over the week-end. I think the Minister should be able to make these arrangements to have the orders cashed on Saturday. I would also like to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that I made a complaint to his Department some time ago which I considered was of a rather serious nature, and got no reply, good, bad or indifferent. I may say that this seems rather strange to me. I have never before communicated representations to the Department to which I did not get an answer, but on this occasion I received no reply. This representation was that a telegram was sent to me from Portarlington post office on the 18th February, 1944, with no name upon the telegram. I have it here. It stated that a certain meeting which I, with other Deputies, was to attend, had been cancelled. It was sent to my home address, and immediately it was sent there it was sent from my home address up to Leinster House. When I received it, I had sufficient common sense and intelligence to see that there must be something wrong, because I had received a letter that morning from the curate in Monasterevan saying he was speaking at the meeting. Immediately I sent a telegram to him, and got a reply back the same day that the meeting had not been cancelled at all, but was being held. I think it is very unfair that a member of the Dáil should receive a telegram of this nature.
I think it only fair that the Minister should tell the people in Portarlington to find out who was the sender, because I have asked the postmaster in Mountmellick who sent it and I am convinced that it is not in order to send a telegram unless the sender's name and address are on the back. I am satisfied that that is the law, and I think the Minister should take the necessary steps to find who was the sender of the telegram and communicate with me and I will deal with it in the proper quarter. It is a rather serious thing for a public representative to receive a telegram stating that a meeting has been cancelled when it may be attended by other Deputies. I wish also to draw the Minister's attention to the various applications made to him by individuals who wish to have telephones installed. I have interested myself in several applications and I found that in some cases the telephones have been installed and in others the applications have been turned down. I think the Minister should have some arrangement with his Department that telephones will be installed in cases of necessity, that is to say, for hotels, cattle dealers and agents dealing in turf production or any type of agricultural production. I think these people should have preference for the installation of telephones. I understand a number of well-known hotels in provincial districts have made applications for telephones in order to carry on their business efficiently, but the Department cannot see their way to have them installed. I am quite well aware that owing to the emergency there may be a shortage of the necessary instruments, but I think the Minister should do his best to meet the requirements of these people so that they can properly equip their establishments with telephones for the convenience of their customers. Further, I have no remarks to make, but I would be very glad if the Minister would investigate the question of the telegram because it has surprised me to receive no reply from the Department. In conclusion, I wish to say that I am convinced that his Department is efficiently run, and as far as I am concerned I have no complaints to make with regard to its administration and I am satisfied that the Minister has carried on the Department as Minister with efficiency, capacity and competence.
I wish to join in the appeal made by other speakers for the improvement of Post Office workers generally. Deputy Norton spoke of the system being Victorian, but the fact is that the whole wage system is Victorian so far as many classes of State servants are concerned. I think the Post Office is probably the worst Department of the lot in that respect. Almost every time the Estimate is discussed we find some Deputies speaking about the wages and conditions of Post Office workers, but nothing is ever done about it. For the last several years there have been very few improvements and the few improvements there have been have not been worth a tuppenny damn. I think it is farcical for us to be passing Conditions of Employment Acts with holidays and so forth and so on when, at the same time, we deny to the employees of the State decent conditions.
I would like to get the Minister to change his mind in his attitude to the establishment of telephones in isolated rural areas. I have had occasion to bring this matter to the notice of the Minister on a few occasions before, particularly in connection with a constituency like mine, Mayo, where isolated districts are sometimes ten to 20 miles away from the nearest local town, in areas like Tourmakeady, or Pollabaun near Louisburg. When people get ill and want a doctor or a priest they have no way of communicating with the outside areas except by riding ten or 15 miles to the nearest town on a horse. The establishment of telephones the Minister said could not justify the expense involved because the amount of money that would be taken in would not cover the expense.
I think that is a completely wrong basis on which to deal with these people's problems. I think these people are entitled to the benefits of the telephone services as much as the people living in the towns. As a matter of fact if the telephone service is to fulfil its proper service in this country I think these are the people who should be catered for. I would again appeal to the Minister that the telephone should be installed in these isolated areas whether it would pay or not in order to give these people the benefit of the service and give them assistance particularly in these difficult times. There is one other matter I want to mention. Throughout the country postmistresses have responsibility for dealing with large sums of money. Time and again, these people are charged in the courts with embezzlement. Most of them are paid a miserable amount for the work they do and the responsibility they bear. It is exposing them to temptation to put that responsibility on them and pay them something equivalent to 10/- or 12/- a week. Business men know that those handling cash must be paid a sufficient wage, as that is the very best safeguard for the proper handling of the cash. I would ask the Minister to revise the scales of pay in these cases and so remove the cause of these people succumbing to temptation. In other respects, the services of the Department throughout the country are carried on efficiently and are very much appreciated by the public as a whole.
I would like to draw attention to a question which has been lost sight of by others. Postmen who have given service for years and who have retired through age or bad health are granted a miserable pittance, in no way in keeping with the cost of living to-day. Those men have had to travel the roads during the winter, in frost and snow, and some have had to give up through ill-health. I know some in my own town who are in a very bad position and who, but for the help of friends, would have to enter the county home. I ask the Minister to consider those people.
The rural postmen are very badly treated. It was only lately that some of the auxiliaries got the uniform. I know postmen who were appointed after the last war, temporarily, and who have not been made permanent yet. That is a great injustice to men serving the Post Office for years. I am sure the Minister knows those who were appointed permanently and those who were appointed temporarily, and I would ask him to look into their cases.
During the recent issue of ration books I met postmen at 7 o'clock in the evening, having to go back again delivering ration books through the whole area which they had covered in the morning. I understand they got a little overtime pay, but it would be better if unemployed young men could have been engaged to do that work and given something worth while.
I am surprised to hear the secretary of the Post Office Workers' Union say that a certain number of men in the Post Office are so badly paid. The organisation should have done more for them by now. Every worker organised in city and country has a cost-of-living bonus of 12/- and I am surprised that the Post Office workers should be getting so low a wage, considering the organisation they have.
Some time ago, I had occasion to make representations to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in connection with a grievance of the Wexford people, in consequence of the post office there being very much understaffed. I am very glad to say that the Minister has since made certain adjustments, which have eased the position. Even yet, however, there is not a sufficient number of people employed there to ensure proper service to the public. The Post Office is now about to administer the Children's Allowances Act and I hope the improvements the Minister has made will not be nullified by these extra duties. I hope that even more staff will be sent to offices like Wexford to deal with this extra business.
In recent years, most of the new social services have been administered through the Post Office, and the staff have been put to the pin of their collar to do the work allotted each day. As Deputy Norton and Deputy Larkin have pointed out, they work at high pressure all day. It is nothing new now to wait almost an hour before being served on certain days of the week, as when old age pensions are being paid.
I would ask the Minister to do something regarding protective clothing for postmen. My information is that a considerable time elapses before it is supplied, and then it is of an inferior quality. I met a postman quite recently, in a rural area in my constituency, and although the cape he had was comparatively new, the water was running through it, and the man would have been better off without it. In winter time, especially, these men have strenuous work to do, and it is not too much to expect the authorities to see that they are properly protected.
The last speaker mentioned the conditions under which postal workers are working at present and was inclined to blame the organisation to which they belong. That organisation has been working hard for them for many years. The Deputy stated that all other workers have got a bonus of 12/-. I only wish that were true. As a matter of fact, the ceiling bonus is 11/- per week and many workers have received little more than half of that up to the present. I suppose that was due to the inefficiency of some of the organisations and also to the fact that very many workers are not members of any organisation. It is in very bad taste for such a Deputy to criticise an organisation which is doing its best for postal workers. What I have to say about wireless broadcasting I must; I suppose, reserve for the next Estimate. I again ask the Minister to give special attention to the position of rural postmen and auxiliary postmen who are so badly paid. They cannot select the hours during which they will go to the country districts to deliver letters and parcels. They are badly treated, and I suggest to the Minister that he should give special attention to their case.
Notwithstanding the difficulties that have been pointed out to us about telephone development, I want to draw the Minister's attention to the very bad service there is through the Mullingar Exchange, as well as to the understaffing of the office. During the past few years, I have written innumerable letters to the Department. In fact, I have written to the Minister himself, and with his usual courtesy he replied to me—though there was really nothing in the letter—pointing out that the service was good, whereas it is not. It is quite usual, in the case of trunk calls to Dublin from any suboffice or subscriber in the Mullingar area, to experience a delay of two hours. That is not right. A call from Dublin to Mullingar gets through quickly, but over the last three months a call from a subscriber in the Mullingar area to Dublin means a delay of two hours. I am a subscriber myself. If you book a call about 9 o'clock in the morning you get through quickly, between 9 and 10 o'clock. If, however, you do not book the call until after 10 o'clock, you are lucky if you get through before lunch hour. That is a fact, and that is the experience that I and other subscribers have had during the past three months. I will not repeat what the staff say about it. The office is understaffed, with the result that the staff at Mullingar are not able to handle the business. Something should be done about it.
Another matter that I want to draw the Minister's attention to is the delay that takes place as regards calls from Westmeath to Meath. For example, at Oldcastle, which is ten miles from my place, I may book a call at 11 o'clock in the morning. After that I may go to my lunch or into the country. It may be 3 o'clock in the afternoon when a messenger comes to me to say that the call has come through from Oldcastle. That is the experience of everybody. The call has to go through Dublin and that causes delay. Something should be done to improve the telephone service in places like Trim, Oldcastle and Navan, all of which are in the Mullingar area. A considerable amount of business is done at Trim.
I said on previous occasions that it appeared to me that the telephone and postal services in this country had been originally planned on the railway system. Whatever be their origin, the fact is that Streete, in the County Westmeath, is served through the Longford area. It is only a short distance from Mullingar, and yet a call from Streete has to go through Longford. That causes delay. In order to further illustrate the difficulties in the position, may I say that Streete and Rathowen are in the Coole dispensary area? If a person in Streete wants the dispensary doctor or the veterinary surgeon and decides to call either on the telephone, the call has, one might say, to go around the world. I would ask the Minister, in the case of post-war development, to conceive a telephone service on a county basis. The county is generally a unit working within itself, and we should not have these cross-sections through other counties which we have in the case of the postal and telephone service. I admit that some improvement was made in the telephone service during the term of office of this Government, but I must say that it was due to representations made by the Opposition. I am afraid that I will have to take this matter up with Opposition Deputies in my constituency in the hope of something being done. I see no hope of getting anything done myself.
What I find is that the postal authorities get an idea into their head and they stick to it, whether they are right or wrong. They have a complex which is common to the Civil Service. If they take up a certain point of view, then, according to them, it is right, and must be proved to be right whether it is so or not. They contended for years that Rathowen could never be served with a telephone service: that there were technical and other difficulties in the way that made such a service impossible, and that it would have to be served through Streete post office. The late Mr. P. W. Shaw, when a member of the Dáil, for years made representations to have Rathowen linked up. I also did the same for years. It could not be linked up, we were told; but when the L.D.F. came along and said that it was necessary to have it linked up, it was done within a week. Even then the Post Office authorities did not give way. It is 16 or 17 miles from Mullingar, and in order not to admit that they were wrong, when it was linked up they gave it a Mullingar number. But last year they swallowed the anchor and gave it a Streete number. Eventually, I suppose, they will give Streete post office and the local Gárda barracks a telephone of their own. It is time, I think, that such an attitude should cease in the Post Office. There is that case where the military necessities of the time proved to the Post Office authorities that a telephone was necessary. I think they should have swallowed the anchor more gracefully than they did.
The telephone service is a source of great benefit to the State. I hope that, in any post-war planning that we have, it will be developed to the fullest extent. It saves transport and time. I hope something will be done to avoid the delays that I referred to in the opening part of my speech. I cannot speak from an intimate knowledge of the technical side of the telephone service, but I understand that there is a system in operation by which ten people can talk at the one time on the line to Cork. The sooner we have such a system in operation in Mullingar the better.
I wish to refer to the wages paid to rural postmen. These men are placed in a very awkward position by reason of the fact that if they do not work 18 hours per week they are not eligible for National Health Insurance benefit. That means that they are deprived of any means of subsistence during a period of incapacity. A postman, for example, who works 17½ hours a week is not insurable and, therefore, cannot draw National Health Insurance benefit when he is ill.
That would arise on another Estimate; it does not concern my Department. It would not be easy for me to deal in detail with all the matters that have been raised on this Estimate. Most of the criticisms of my Department turn on the question of cost. It is not altogether realised that, while our commercial accounts show a profit, actually the amount of money paid by the public in creating that surplus is paid through taxation. One-fourth of the postal services, one-fifth of the telegraph and one-sixth of the telephone services are paid actually by other Departments of the State, so that really it is tax money that is paying for over 50 per cent. of our services. There is nothing a Minister would like better than to gain popularity by being placed in a position to build post offices and pay better salaries to the employees, but in the end it is a question of how much taxation we can put on the people and, of course, that involves another Department. This is really a very big question of policy. What we have to do is to try to balance things up and to give the best possible services on an economic basis and to the extent that money is available for us.
Reference has been made to the charges for the delivery of telegrams. It is not correct to say that the charge for porterage must be paid by the recipient. The person sending the telegram may, if he wishes to do so, pay the porterage charge. The position need not be the same as in the story we have heard of the practical joker sending a man a telegram wishing him a very happy Christmas, the telegram involving a payment of half a crown at the other end. So far as the delivery of telegrams is concerned, there is actually a loss already and there would be a further very considerable loss if we were to remove the porterage charge altogether.
Deputies referred to the publication of the telephone directory. It is being published once a year. As regards the persons who become subscribers in the interval, if we find there is a very considerable number of changes, we will consider the advisability of issuing a supplement. So far, we have not had any complaints of a widespread character. In any event, one can always get a telephone number from the exchange if it is not in the directory.
Mr. Larkin
There have been large numbers of alterations in Dublin and it might be advisable to issue a supplement.
We will be publishing a new directory within the next month or so. Deputy Dillon seems to have been very unfortunate in his telephone calls. The members of our staff who make tests arising out of delays on telephones tell me that the work is done very carefully and, since we opened the new exchange in Exchequer Street, the average length of time is only four seconds. Occasionally, of course, you may have greater delays, especially from point to point, where you have different exchanges intervening. It is not possible for us to improve that situation because it necessitates a special type of equipment which we cannot get into the country at the moment. As regards the carrier system, to which Deputy Kennedy referred, we cannot get that equipment until after the war.
Deputy Dillon mentioned the difficulty arising out of another person intervening in the course of a telephone call. That does happen occasionally on the automatic system: it is a defect which does occur. For instance, if two people ring the same number, the first person may be already in contact when the second person rings, and it is possible that the second person may cut into the conversation. That happens occasionally, but it is really very seldom that it occurs, and it is definitely a defect in the automatic system. We have examined that matter very carefully, but it is not possible at the moment to introduce any remedy. It is well known that it occurs on automatic systems. There is no question of the intervention by the second person being deliberate, or that it was done designedly to cut in on Deputy Dillon's conversation. It would be quite impossible for an official to do that. If that happened, and it could be proved that any official deliberately did it, that official would not be long in the service.
Mr. Larkin
The Deputy did not suggest that an official did it.
He suggested there were sometimes certain facilities created on the part of officials for examination purposes, and I would like to remove any impression he may have given in that connection. It is unfortunate that the Deputy is not here at the moment. In a debate of this sort, people have a way of coming into the debate, firing their shots and then going away. I have often felt that I would like to reply at the time when various points were brought forward. In any case, I was anxious to clear up that point—that it could not be done by an official.
Questions with reference to the mail bags have been raised from time to time. That was an old difficulty, but I may say that the position has now been very definitely improved. Deputy Briscoe raised some interesting points, but I am afraid we will not be able to do very much about them. We will, however, have the position very carefully examined as to whether larger deposits could not be made in the Savings Bank. The position is that a single depositor can hold £2,000 in the Savings Bank, but the amount of savings per year is limited to £500. However, any individual can have Savings Certificates as well to the amount of £280. The Savings Certificates bring in 3½ per cent. as we must take into consideration that there is no income-tax. The investments in the Savings Bank bring in 2½ per cent. The object, of course, in the Savings Bank is to encourage persons to save small amounts from time to time. I think it would be a mistake to allow that to develop into the region of what might be considered speculative saving, because it might interfere with the work which is very satisfactorily done by the bigger banks. I shall have the matter closely examined to see if we could increase the amount of £2,000, especially in view of the fact that we are out on this drive to induce the people to save more money.
And you are buying money at 4 per cent. for Government purposes.
That is a consideration, no doubt, but you may come up against certain commercial interests.
When you were in opposition you said you would put all these interests in their proper place.
Deputy Norton raised the question of buildings. I mentioned in my Estimate that we are giving special attention to the office in Waterford. Wherever it is urgent to deal with the question, it is dealt with. I am afraid the Deputy spoils his case sometimes by overstatement. First of all, we have to be careful about what we do in the way of developing premises. Some of this business is only emergency business and we cannot make permanent changes which afterwards will not be justified. There is a great amount of work at present for which we must make temporary arrangements. For instance, the amount of money coming in by telegraph at present will not continue when the emergency is over. The best we can do is to have counters specially provided. We have done that on the representations of Deputies, and I think the public is generally satisfied with the position as it is now.
Deputy Norton raised the question of the Pearse Street sorting office. I went to the Pearse Street sorting office. It is a wooden construction, but a wooden building is by no means a bad building. As a matter of fact, a construction of wood is very often better from the point of view of temperature than a construction of concrete or stone; it is healthier. So far as I know, there has been no complaint from the operatives there since the Pearse Street premises have been arranged and set out.
Would the Minister ask his Department to show him the file from the staff about the matter? Would the Minister like to do a week's work in Pearse Street, especially night duty? I suggest that the Minister should start off with night duty.
I cannot answer the Deputy right off. So far as I know, there has been no very serious complaint about it.
It is an old disused distillery which every firm in Dublin passed by until the Post Office were induced to take it over.
The buildings I saw there were well equipped. They were mostly of wood. Of course, there is nothing very magnificent about the outside.
The Minister was on a conducted tour.
The point raised about the sanitary arrangements, I understand, is entirely inaccurate; it is an exaggeration. I think the arrangements are excellent and there could be no complaint about them.
I did not mention anything about the sanitary arrangements.
Mr. Larkin
I raised the question in regard to sub-post offices.
The question of wages was also raised. To give a picture of the basic wage, which might be a very valid consideration at the normal period, without giving a picture of the bonus attached to it is to give a very unfair picture of the payment of employees by the Post Office at the moment. For instance, Post Office clerks who are getting 18/- a week rising to 70/-, have a bonus of 15/7 rising to 43/9. That gives quite a different picture. I do not pretend that we are not very much exercised from time to time by the change in the cost of living and the hardship involved. That really covers the proportion of bonus as compared with the basic salary. Of course, a standstill Order was made which applies not merely to the Post Office, but to the whole Civil Service. We cannot override that standstill Order except by way of emergency bonus, and that is the only elastic part of the payment for the time being.
Before the emergency various attempts were made, both by the Deputy's union and by ourselves, to try to negotiate an improvement with the Department of Finance. The union's demands were very big. They were looking for an increase which would have swallowed up anything that looked like a surplus on the Post Office Vote; it would have involved over £200,000 if we had acceded to their demands. But, even then, we did improve the situation by about £14,000. We were trying to get a further improvement when the emergency came on us and we were unable to pursue the matter further.
Mr. Larkin
Will the Minister agree that the Minister for Industry and Commerce gave an increase in the basic wage in the case of the railway servants? He gave them a 5/- increase in the basic wage.
I do not know. I cannot discuss the Department of Industry and Commerce.
Mr. Larkin
You can get that by applying to the office.
I suppose we are not at the end of increases yet. The bringing in of telephonists during their rest periods will not occur again. It was done at a time when some of the officers were being trained and were not in a position to take on duty. That will not occur again.
We have the Minister's authority for that—that it will not occur again?
Yes, I think I can say that, unless——
Leave out the "unless"; do not spoil it.
The Deputy knows the kind of emergency that occurs.
You were going on all right until you were put on the wrong track.
It is a tremendously big Department and is subject to emergencies. There have been a few occasions where they were not but, generally speaking, our officers are very amenable to discipline. It is the public they are serving when they do work of that sort.
If there was a little more in the pay envelope it would be better.
With regard to anything that may occur in the future, when we know whether or not the Savings Bank programme is successful, we will be prepared to increase the staff to deal with the work involved if necessary. As to the question of officers at the counter, it is true, of course, that when there is a shortage they pay the 5 per cent. mentioned. It is only in a very few cases that an officer will have to pay more than 5 per cent., and only where there has been constant repetition and indication of neglect. If there is any particular case the Deputy has in mind where he thinks an officer has been rather severely treated, we are always prepared to examine it. But, generally speaking, that rule is held to rigidly, that only 5 per cent. is asked for where there is a shortage. Of course, it is perfectly obvious that we must guard against abuse of that, because it might lead to abuse if we were not very careful.
As to the rumour with regard to ground rents, the Deputy will understand how difficult it is to make a search suddenly as to who is the owner of the ground rent. As a matter of fact, it was easy for us, because the ownership of these ground rents has not changed for several years, and the same ground landlords are there so long that we can say that that rumour is absolutely false.
Mr. Larkin
Why not take them over yourself?
That would mean an investment of capital. It does not much matter whether you pay an annual sum or buy them out.
They are not owned by non-nationals?
No.
Mr. Larkin
I asked for an explanation about the telegram, and also why these girls cannot get a rest period and have a rest room.
With regard to the girls, I believe that they have a rather nice place where they can rest and get a cup of tea.
Mr. Larkin
Is there a rest room in these places where there is a large number of women workers?
There is such a room, I understand. With regard to the telegram, we were very grateful to the Deputy for having gone to that trouble about it, and we sent him a letter which possibly may reach him within the next few days.
Mr. Larkin
I accept the Minister's explanation, but the letter has not reached me yet.
I should like to know if the Minister has received any complaints with regard to the appointment of temporary postmen. If a postman becomes ill, it is the custom of the postmaster to make application to the local employment exchange for a suitable candidate for the vacancy. Have any representations been made to the Minister as to persons who are not suitable for Post Office work being sent out by employment exchanges? I have known cases of persons with experience of Post Office work who were registered with an employment exchange but who, because they were not married or were not in receipt of a higher amount of unemployment assistance, did not secure the positions while people with no practical experience of the work were appointed. Would it be possible for the Minister to make representations to the Department of Industry and Commerce with a view to forwarding to the various postmasters the names of individuals who have practical experience of, and are efficient in, carrying out Post Office work? I should also like to know if the Minister proposes to find out who sent the telegram to which I referred.
That seems to be a mystery. A telegram must be accepted if it is handed in. We cannot trace the individual who sent this telegram, but it sounded to me like a practical poke.
I think a telegram should not be accepted unless it is signed.
Mr. Larkin
Is it not a regulation that a telegram should not be accepted from any person without some authority being given by him? If I send a telegram, I am bound to sign something.
It is usually refused unless it is signed.
Apart from that, nobody knows who sent this telegram.
I have my suspicions.
That is rather outside our province.
Vote put and agreed to.